Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, protecting the speaker of the House has become a more important national priority – and that's all the White House has to say today about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's kerfuffle-stirring bid for an airliner-sized military jet for her long commute from Washington home to San Francisco and back.

The 12-seat corporate-styled jet that the Department of Defense provided for former House Speaker Dennis Hastert for his commutes home to Illinois isn't suitable for the long haul to California, says the House -- now seeking an aircraft capable of a nonstop commute between D.C. and the Golden Gate. (Scroll on to see Pelosi, in her own words, explaining the airplane flap -- and suggesting she could live without the security.)

With the Department of Defense promising the new speaker a bigger ride, pending availability of the military's markup of the Boeing 757-200, the White House is attempting to stay out of the air-space of a story that is causing the Democratic House leader a bit of eyebrow-raising publicity today -- as some House Republicans cry foul over this particular frequent flyer's seating request.

This is a model of the military aircraft the House wants for the new speaker's nonstop Washington-San Francisco route.

There is a purpose for military conveyances of the elected official who stands second in line to succession of the president in the event of a catastrophe, the White House maintains.

"In the wake of 9/11, the Department of Defense decided that in order to protect the speaker they would fly him,'' Snow said today. "The whole purpose is to find an appropriate and effective conveyance for the speaker of the House.''

The House sergeant at arms said today that it is he, not the speaker, negotiating with the Defense Department for an aircraft more suitable for the needs of the new speaker.

"This is not my request.,'' Pelosi said today. "This is the sergeant at arms'' of the House requesting a bigger plane for her, she said, maintaining that she'd prefer to travel without any security. "I don't have to go in that plane. I can go commercial.''

This is what Pelosi had to say about the airplane.

Republicans complain that Pelosi is abusing the privilege of her her office in seeking an airliner-sized conveyance with room for family and friends on the long hops home and back.

The Republican National Committee today is billing it as "Pelosi's power trip'' and has taken to calling the speaker ''Non-Stop Nancy.'' The speaker, the RNC says, "seeks (a) flight of fancy.''

What's noteworthy about this is that the RNC and White House have taken different tacks on the same story -- unusual for an operation that normally operates off the same script.

And House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) has taken yet a third tack, seeking a middle ground, calling the use of a military aircraft understandable but Pelosi's request "over the top:"

"I think that it's clear, after 9/11, that the White House suggested to Speaker Hastert that he fly a military aircraft because the speaker is, in fact, third in line to the presidency. And so I think having access to a plane for the speaker to travel to and from their district, is appropriate.

"I think the questions that have been raised about friends, supporters, relatives, other members flying with her are where the concerns lie, and appear to me to be requests that's a bit over the top,'' Boehner adds

Other Republicans are hewing to the tougher RNC tack.

"It's an extravagance of power the taxpayers won't swallow,'' says Rep. Adam Putnam (R-Fla.), chair of the House Republican Conference.

"It has nothing to do with family and friends and everything to do about security," Pelosi says. "It's not a question of size. It's a question of distance,'' she adds. "We want an aircraft that can reach California."

It's true that the 12-seat Air Force jet that ferried Hastert home and back could make the Chicago loop without refueling. But for Pelosi, it takes a 757-200 to raise a home-village visit without stopping for fuel.

A Pentagon spokesman has promised a big bird, based on availability.

Yet the White House is staying out of this First Class dispute over airborne accommodations, maintaining these negotiations are strictly between the sergeant at arms of the House and the Department of Defense. "This is not something we're in the midst of,'' Snow says.

Comments

Watch the right jump on this article. Remember Hastert flew all over the Country in the 2006 run on Military tranport.

Posted by: Dale Peters | Feb 8, 2007 9:04:34 AM&nbsp

It won't be long before she's flying in Air Force 1.She needs the larger plane for security reasons.Fat Denny used the smaller plane because of all the stops they made at buffets!!!

Posted by: Raving Loon | Feb 8, 2007 9:05:28 AM&nbsp

She wants a plane that has 42 business class seats, a stateroom, an entertainment center, a bedroom and a crew of 16. Who can justify that? And why didn't you mention this in the article??

Posted by: KB | Feb 8, 2007 9:31:13 AM&nbsp

The DOD has promised the new speaker a bigger and better ride. Oh my gosh, I actually agree with Tony Snowjob here. "Extravagance of power the taxpayers won't swallow". Hmmm, Mr. Republican Congressman from Florida, that's opening a big can of worms. Pelosi is #3 in line to become President. Bush flies Air Force One everyday at the taxpayers expense. Cheney flies Air Force 2 everyday at the taxpayers expense. And fat J. Dennis Hastert flew all over the country and world at the taxpayers expense.

Posted by: Doug R. | Feb 8, 2007 9:36:33 AM&nbsp

One word: California. She cannot have a plane that is smaller than other Celebrity people in CA! Let's get real people!!!!!

Posted by: Dan | Feb 8, 2007 9:41:24 AM&nbsp

If Tony Snow himself says that this is a silly story and unfair to the Speaker, why is there a "controversy?"
Would anyone like to ask Rep. Putnam and other GOP critics if they objected to Bush flying Air Force 1 all over the US last fall to campaign for their elections? Who paid for those campaign trips anyways? Was it the GOP warchest or taxpayers?

Posted by: stan | Feb 8, 2007 9:44:17 AM&nbsp

Ah the Bozo Left shines!! Hastert didn't fly "all over the country," Dale. Plus, he used a 12-seater. Nancy wants to use the plane that military personnel use. She doesn't want to have to make any stops on her way back to California or wherever she might want to go. Nancy truly wants to keep fly-over country, fly-over country, costing U.S. taxpayers millions and millions of dollars. Let he fly in a remote-controlled plane!

Posted by: John D | Feb 8, 2007 9:46:38 AM&nbsp

Democrat or Republican - it's all an abuse of power and a waste of our tax payers dollars. It's just amazing how blatant it is.

Posted by: SEH | Feb 8, 2007 9:56:46 AM&nbsp

It didn't take this babe long to fall into the power pool did it!
Coming from CA you would think she would prefer a Prius over a gas-guzzler like the 757.

Posted by: John J. Sciackitano | Feb 8, 2007 10:05:35 AM&nbsp

I think all issues like this need to be addressed
and investigated. But don't stop here. Let's look at "all" the waste in spending. Lets not make these political issues. Case in point is KB
who says she asked for all these other things when in this thread it is a matter of a non-stop flight. Keep the rhetoric out of it and put the hammer down on all waste. When issues come up like this and coruption, we start tit for tat about dems and repubs, while the real issue eludes us.

Posted by: bill r. | Feb 8, 2007 10:12:30 AM&nbsp

What a piece of work Ms. Pelosi is! There are several other passenger transports in the USAF inventory suitable for her nonstop ride to the left coast. She's requested the nicest ride on the taxpayers dime. Culture of corruption, indeed. If she's perfectly amenable to flying commercial, and enduring it's inevitable delays (as it's been reported in other places) why the stink about the occaisional stop for fuel? The Gulfstream, Hastert's ride, will make it save for a strong headwind.

Posted by: Aureate Arriviste | Feb 8, 2007 10:14:06 AM&nbsp

The D.O.D. will call her plane, Left Wing One.
This just another story about how the democrats just love to spend our tax dollars on frivolity.
Paulo

Posted by: Paulo | Feb 8, 2007 10:16:18 AM&nbsp

John D how come you didn't tell us you where running for President LOL. By the way Hastert flew Military tranport to every dinner to raise funds for the right and you. Go watch the you tube I posted its you

Posted by: Dale Peters | Feb 8, 2007 10:16:51 AM&nbsp

"...costing U.S. taxpayers millions and millions of dollars."

John D: You of course don't have the actual figures, but it's established that we borrow "millions and millions of dollars" every ten minutes for your beloved war (albeit a war you're too chicken to fight in). My guess is a year's worth of the speaker's use of the "big" plane represents a cost difference compared to use of the "small" plane of less than a day in your favorite quagmire.

If even Tony Snowjob can let this one go, maybe you should borrow a brain for once and let this one go too.

Posted by: john d | Feb 8, 2007 10:18:16 AM&nbsp

Let's be clear here, none of the reports have stated that Pelosi or her staff specifically requested the 757. They requested a plane that could make the trip non-stop, and the 757 is one of the options on the table.

Posted by: Tony | Feb 8, 2007 10:28:20 AM&nbsp

This is so insane! Another national leader up in the air? No! Wait! The President and Vice should fly, they need that means of transport. But the Speaker, our No. 3 Ace in the Hole Card, the Speaker should travel via a well armed, ultra modern train car, with a Marine Band. She (in our current case) shouldn't be risking her life like the other two; she should be well protected and moving around the country on the ground. Think about it! Please! We dare not risk her life, or anyone else's in the line of succession, No.4 through 99 should all travel buy other transport! And in'cognito, too! Can't be too careful these days, ya' know?

Posted by: Rue-Mur | Feb 8, 2007 10:31:36 AM&nbsp

This is the same person (Pelosi) who turned over the Presido to a trust controlled by her real-estate mogule husband and his buddies for pennies on the dollar.

She wants to be like Gore - lecture the "sheeple" on global warming from her 757 jet liner that she gets all to herself. Oh, by the way, a stretch Hummer limo picks her up at the airport and her entourage all drives their own Suburban's. Do what I say, not what I do.

Posted by: marc | Feb 8, 2007 10:34:47 AM&nbsp

[quote]
She wants a plane that has 42 business class seats, a stateroom, an entertainment center, a bedroom and a crew of 16. Who can justify that? And why didn't you mention this in the article??
Posted by: KB | Feb 8, 2007 9:31:13 AM
[/quote]

KB:

I saw no such references to "stateroom", "entertainment center", or "bedroom" in this article or in several I've read online this morning. Do you have a link to a story that actually mentions these alleged demands?

Posted by: BC | Feb 8, 2007 10:34:47 AM&nbsp

Give her a big plane. Maybe a military cargo plane of that size which will make it to California without refueling but doesn't have any ammenties other then a bathroom. I am sure she is not asking for the luxuries, just a plane to get her to and fro.

Posted by: notwen | Feb 8, 2007 10:34:54 AM&nbsp

[quote]
The D.O.D. will call her plane, Left Wing One.
This just another story about how the democrats just love to spend our tax dollars on frivolity.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | Feb 8, 2007 10:16:18 AM
[/quote]

Paulo:

Where was your indignation when pResident Doogie Howser was flying around the country campaigning for Republicans in the election of 2006 - all at taxpayer expense? Where was your indignation when Vice pResident Cheney was flying around the country campaigning for Republicans in the election of 2006 - all at taxpayer expense?

Your hypocrasy is showing.

P.S. - you STILL haven't told us what YOUR middle name is.

Posted by: BC | Feb 8, 2007 10:38:12 AM&nbsp

Maybe Hastert's plane will work for Pelosi given that it won't have to endure all the extra weight. That's gotta be a drag on MPG.

I WAS against Pelosi's using a bigger, better plane for all the reasons given by the observant right. It wasn't until I saw the reference to the need for improved security that I came up with the slightest argument in favor of her having a plane that would make it to the coast without refueling (does a refuel stop really involve that much more security risk?).

Posted by: John | Feb 8, 2007 10:38:22 AM&nbsp

Hey Paulo no comment on your face on the swamp

Posted by: Dale Peters | Feb 8, 2007 10:38:28 AM&nbsp

Yes,Fat Denny flew all over the country.Rumor has it he hit every KFC,Burger King,White Castle,and Big Mac in every state in the union.

Now,the fat arse is in the Minority,he has to ride Amtrak home,with his little happy meal.

And Nancy rides the "Big" plane eating quiche and sipping fine wines.Madam Speaker,live like a queen!

Posted by: Raving Loon | Feb 8, 2007 10:40:10 AM&nbsp

I mistakenly posted over "john d" in response to the real john d's inanity. Sorry about that, real john D -- although you're still wrong.

Posted by: a blinkin | Feb 8, 2007 10:44:38 AM&nbsp

Comments are not posted immediately. We review them first in an effort to remove foul language, commercial messages, irrelevancies and unfair attacks. Thank you for your patience.